Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A.D. 2000 as seen from 1966

  1. May 14, 2007 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,835128-1,00.html
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 14, 2007 #2

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    They should have kept there predictions more modest, as in we would have the capability to . . . . .
     
  4. May 14, 2007 #3
    "The new thing will be transport by ballistic rocket, capable of reaching any place on earth in 40 minutes."

    Hmmm, I have a feeling that would not be a pleasant flight :-/
     
  5. May 14, 2007 #4
    Then again, was the ubiquity of an internet and the development of related technology predicted? We seem to have focused on communication rather than transportation, is all.
     
  6. May 14, 2007 #5

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The article is six pages long...

    I find this sort of retrospective useful for fine tuning expectations. And I especially liked the concluding comment.

    A journey of a thousand miles begins not with a single step, but with a map.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2007
  7. May 14, 2007 #6
    I think it all comes down to per capita energy use. Building self-driving cars, ballistic rocket transportation etc. is going to require HUGE amounts of energy for EVERYBODY & frankly, it just isn't there. Perhaps this will change as solar's becoming competitive with the local power companies, but I don't know.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2007
  8. May 14, 2007 #7

    I think that slight drop in per capita energy use came about when the government finally mandated more efficient automobiles, appliances, and air conditioners.
     
  9. May 15, 2007 #8

    Chi Meson

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Well, they were bang on with the anticipation of our kitchen robots preparing our food! But one little correct prediction in a huge morass of wishful thinking (an implated device "that will let the deaf hear"--come on!), well that is statistically inevitable .
     
  10. May 15, 2007 #9

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I think there was unbridled or irrational exuberance with what science and technology could achieve in the 1950's and 1960's. That was after WWII, which saw dramatic advances in electronics (radar, TV, . . . ), computers, communications, nuclear energy, and the space race. With those achievements, anything seemed possible. But then I used a slide rule through 1975.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_rule
    http://www.hpmuseum.org/sliderul.htm
    http://www.sliderule.ca/

    As for a device to allow the deaf to hear, it depends on where the fault lies. One of my nephews lost hearing at age 2 due to meningitis. He can partially hear with a cochlea implant, but he has experienced a learning deficit, partly because the educational system is genearlly not structured appropriately for children with his condition, and he is shunned by the deaf community since his parents made the decision to try to restore some of his hearing.
     
  11. May 15, 2007 #10

    Chi Meson

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Ironic sarcasm goes "plunk." Again!

    We do NOT have robotic arms preparing our meals and doing kitchen work, yet we DO have the ear implants. My examples of correct and incorrect predictions were reversed. IT's FUNNY! (keep up with me people, I work quickly)

    Where is the "sardonic smiley"?
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2007
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: A.D. 2000 as seen from 1966
  1. 2000 posts (Replies: 9)

  2. 2000 yr old Elvis (Replies: 15)

Loading...